Discuss: Fencing Israel

Think about Arafat and Castro.

Both lost their ‘sugar daddies’ when the Soviet Union collapsed.  The Palestinians were hit twice - with an influx of Jews from the Soviet Union, Israel found that it didn’t need Palestinian labor.  Then they realized that people from E. Europe, Africa, Bangla Desh, et cetera were happy to come in and work, and did not present the special security challenges that the Palestinians present.

Castro, with no market for his sugar and limited access to markets for his cigars, thanks to our dear old Uncle Sam, built sustainable agriculture in Cuba.  The Cubans got thinner - hell - everybody is thinner than Americans - but they survived.

Arafat turned to the West for aid, got it, and sent his wife to Paris with the money, earmarked for Palestinian development, that made it’s way into his bank accounts.  That’s why Hamas won the election - while they hide behind children, and until they send them to kill Jews, they take good care of people.  Yep, they take good care of the fodder.  (Course that’s more than I can say about my dear old Uncle Sam. We, if you recall, go to war with the army we have.)

The Palestinians should say to themselves we hate those people. But we can’t kill them all. So we may as well build homes, farms, and schools and try to compete with the Chinese and Indians.

As the Israelis say - “Ain Breyra!” Ain’t no other choice. And as the kids say, they ought to get a life.

Actually, it was not the Zionists, many of whom were what we would call egalitarian socialists.

It was the British promising the same land to both the Arabs and the Jews that is the genesis of the problem - the same as it was the British on the Indian sub-continent that triggered much of the problems between the Hindus and the Moslems in India, Pakistan, and Bangla Desh.

Indeed, you can find the nefarious hands of the British virtually everywhere there is conflict around the globe. It was the British who first promised freedom to all of Arab Southwest Asia - and it was the British who betrayed that promise. Instead of guaranteeing Palestinian independence - Britain occupied that country, and as in America and Australia, colonized it with Europeans.

While in theory some early Zionists might be considered egalitarian socialists, theory fell to the wayside in Palestine.  Ahad Haam and his philosophical allies were defeated by those who believed in *socialism in one ethnic group* - the Arabs be damned. Instead the Zionist policy was ‘conquest of land’ and ‘conquest of labor.’ Neither socialist not egalitarian. That’s why in the fabulous institution of the kibbutz, no Arab has ever been asked to be a member.

Larry - Yes, Hamas won the election largely for two reasons - one; they provide social services in a a starved and beaten Israeli-occupied Gaza.  And two; Fatah deals with Israel/US have made its leaders into fat cats who make lots of money under the Israeli occupation. (That happened in Vichy (Occupied) France too. It could be called ‘collaboration.’)In the meantime, Fatah had not gained one dunam of land for the Palestinians in 40 years, nor a moment’s respite from Israeli state terrorism.  So people voted Hamas. (US encourages ‘democracy’ in the Middle East. But only if they get it right.)

That Palestinans are fodder is because Israel educates its children to leave their country and shoot them.  Generation after generation raised in Israel to shoot Arabs. Israeli high school grads have killed 4600 Palestinians (including 982 children among whom 145 were toddlers)over the last 8 years.  And they are killed in their own country - Palestine.

The Israelis should say to themselves - ‘we hate gentiles, especially Palestinians. But we can’t kill them all - so let’s do the best thing for Israel and pull back to our legal borders instead of shooting them in our effort to take the rest of their country.’

The bottom line is that you cannot crete an ethos of environmental conscience while in the process of annihilating a human population. That the Palestinians were forcibly removed from their country by outsiders is crime enough without continuing to carry out more of same right through to the 21st century. And for the conqueror to entertain the hubris that they can now show environmental concern for Ibexes and Hyaxes is unacceptable while carrying out an ethnic cleansing campaign. As unacceptable as Hitler admiring the German forests from his get-way abode in the Alps. As unacceptable as all the ruins of bulldozed Palestinian villages that lie under the soil of Israel’s national parks. There can be no regard for ‘nature’ that does not also include regard for human life. They are inseparable.

Thanks for your comments. I don’t think there’s any use turning this into a debate over the Israel-Palestine conflict. There are plenty of other places on the web to do that and we’re not going to reach any consensus here. I urge readers who want to see more of my thinking on Israel and other subjects to check out my new blog, http://southjerusalem.com.

This has been a good discussion. It is a shame that the author - Haim Watzman - has attempted to cut it off.

A people or political movement will turn to terrorism when it is denied any other means to pursue its political objectives. This is quite clear in the historical record. It is also clear that terrorism will be abandoned and denounced once a people or political movement has a real alternative through which to pursue its political objectives.

When will we - i say “we’ because this can only be accomplished by the USA - provide the Palestinians with a true alternative by which they can pursue their objectives?

I want to recommend a book by an Israeli which is essential reading for those who want to understand Israel and the P-I conflict: “The Tragedy of Zionism: How Its Revolutionary Past Haunts Israeli Democracy” by Bernard Avishai (http://www.google.com/search?q=The+tragedy+of+zionism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)

Open discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is precisely what we need in this country (the USA) - including especially the US role in the conflict. This is true because the US is the #1 impediment to peace. The evidence? 1.Our unqualified military and political support of successive Israel governments, 2. Our refusal to criticize the Israeli government when it flaunts international law, humanitarian standards (did anyone mention collective punishment?) and even the conditions we have said the Israeli government should meet (e.g. freezing settlement building), and (especially)3. the censorship of the media in this country engineered by the American Zionists (you can read my analysis of how this censorship operates on-line at Counterpunch (http://www.counterpunch.org/)

When US policy changes and the US becomes a true “fair and impartial broker” the conflict will end. that is the key and that is what those of us who are Americans must accomplish.

This discussion has a diminishing amount of light and a accelerating rate of heat. But no, let us not cease going over our favorite points. There are some factoids that can still be regurgitated and composed into sentences. The solution will not come from endless discussions; it will come “on the ground,” where it began. There are two peoples in one land, and they shall remain there regardless of what we write here.